Benchmark study of a new simplified DFN model for shearing of intersecting fractures and faults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is challenging to quantitatively predict shearing of intersecting fractures/faults because of dynamic frictional contacts accompanied by possible nonlinear rock deformation. To address such challenges, a new conceptual model—the simplified DFN model—was proposed and validated by Hu et al. 46 to use major paths (MPs) to represent complicated DFNs for calculation of shearing. In this work, we conducted a benchmark study for three examples that involve different levels of complexity of intersecting fractures, and correspondingly different numbers of MPs. The codes and software that were used in the benchmark cover a range of continuum, discontinuum and hybrid numerical methods: NMM (LBNL), FLAC3D (LBNL), GBDEM (KIGAM), FRACOD (DynaFrax), and CASRock (CAS). The general consistency between DFN and MP cases as predicted by all the codes/software demonstrates that major paths can be used to simplify the geometry of DFNs in a wide range of software. Disagreement in results made by some software and potential future improvements are discussed. We show that (1) shearing of one or multiple major fractures can be reduced if there are multiple smaller intersecting fractures in that area, which is a useful basis for understanding and controlling induced seismicity and merits further analysis, and (2) the agreement achieved in the benchmark examples provide confidence that the simplified DFN model is a promising conceptual model that can be used for different types of numerical approaches and software for simplifying the analysis of the shearing of intersecting fractures and faults. • A benchmark study with five different software was conducted to test the simplified DFN model. • Possible mechanisms of stress relaxation and controlling of induced seismicity in DFN are discussed. • Disagreement in results and potential future improvements by different software are discussed. • The agreements between different software demonstrate that the simplified DFN model is applicable in a wide range of software.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".